micro 4/3rds isn't so micro anymore

E

Eric T

Well-known
Local time
5:23 PM
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
762
It is interesting to see how 4/3rds cameras have improved over the years.
A decade ago the Panasonic DMC-L1 was sold and it was a terrific camera for its time and weighed 606g with a battery. the much more capable Panasonic m4/3rds arrived in 2009 and it weighed in (with battery) at 630g.
Today, the m4/3rds Panasonic GH5 weighs 725g with battery.
The GH5 is amazing in many ways but I am not so sure that these cameras should be called micro any longer.
 
The GH-5 is the top of the line, with a good-sized battery for longer videos. Other m4/3 cameras are smaller and lighter.

A Nikon D5 comes in at nearly double the weight, 1415g.
 
nickthetasmaniac said:
There's big cameras, medium cameras, little cameras and positively tiny cameras, all within the MFT microcosm. Options are good no?
Click to expand...

Exactly. That's why I like m4/3. You can have EM1 with huge(not so) tele-zooms to hunt an elephant, or GM5 with pancake or even lens-cap lenses to have in your pocket.
 
Handled-tested an EM1 which was quite a nice camera, Consumer DSLR sized (Canon EOS-Nikon D5xxx size more or less) but packs its punch. Not pocketable though.

I have an EPL2 and it is rather compact. Curiously the size with a sigma 30mm 2.8 is about the same as an OM-1 with a 50mm 1.8; That does cast a doubt about m43 being smaller than 35mm.

Whenever the time to upgrade/phase out my current m43 I will have to choose moving larger or smaller. The GX80/85 seems nice, and the GX8 rather too large for the format. My friend got an LX100 which is nifty.
As film cameras are the "large" cameras per se, I may move towards smaller.
 
I recently traveled to Italy with two M 4/3 camera and one lens for each camera. The overall package was very small and light. I had with me E-P2 and E-PL1 with two outstanding lenses (Zeiss 5cm/1.5 ltm and Summilux 25mm/1.4).
 
It seems to be another example of taking something that was good because it was small, and then making it a lot bigger. With cameras, it all started with the screw-mount Leica; then went on to motor-driven SLRs with two-pound zoom lenses and a Domke f-1x or a Tamrac Pro System 12 filled with 30 more pounds of stuff.
 
I just took advantage of an Olympus promotion to upgrade to a Pen F from an EP-5. The Pen F is slightly smaller and lighter than the EP-5.
 
Dan Daniel said:
Eh??! Details, please. I've been thinking about just this move.
Click to expand...

Olympus has a promotion through, I think, Nov. 7, in which they'll give you a rebate plus an additional amount if you trade in a digital camera with interchangeable lenses for one of Olympus's current m4/3d cameras. In my case, the rebate for the upgrade to the Pen F was $300 plus the trade in value of my EP-5 (over $150 in my case). So I got a new Pen F body for a little over $800.

Comparing the Pen F to the EP-5 in the store, I was surprised that the Pen F is slightly less tall and feels lighter than the EP-5. Olympus appears to have accomplished this by getting rid of the in-camera flash on the EP-5 (which I never used), adding the EVF, and shrinking the camera size slightly. The 20 mp sensor plus EVF seemed like a reasonable upgrade for that price. And the AF on the Pen F is really fast (though I'm not sure it's faster than the fast AF on the EP-5).
 
I also have the EPL-1, but I haven't used it in some time. I found the AF to be very slow and the camera had an annoying habit of going into sleep mode just as I was about to take a picture. But the camera produces lovely results, particularly in color, and if you use "legacy glass" you won't miss the AF anyway.
 
I think it depends entirely on what you choose - where your priorities are. I have for example a Nikon D700 with a pretty big range of veteran and modern lenses and various smaller cameras including an Olympus OM D EM5. I cannot speak for the Panasonic GH5.

While now an oldish camera I think the Nikon is still superior in terms of image quality (in adverse lighting), dynamic range and focusing ability to any M43 camera. But its now the Olympus I take with me on holidays purely because of its size and weight. But the factor that plays into this equation is the size and weight of its lenses. The best M43 lenses give superb images for a fraction of the size and weight of DSLR lenses.

The Nikkors are huge by comparison and this makes a big difference when trying to carry on cameras when traveling by plane. Used to be that it did not make much difference, but now airlines police carry on baggage seriously. And I have no desire to see my camera gera thrown about by careless baggage handlers. Or stolen in transit. So M43 kit may be getting larger but it there is still a world of difference between it and pro Nikon or Canon kit for example. So that's what I take with me - point being its not just the camera size that matters.
 
Bingley said:
Olympus has a promotion through, I think, Nov. 7, in which they'll give you a rebate plus an additional amount if you trade in a digital camera with interchangeable lenses for one of Olympus's current m4/3d cameras. In my case, the rebate for the upgrade to the Pen F was $300 plus the trade in value of my EP-5 (over $150 in my case). So I got a new Pen F body for a little over $800.

Comparing the Pen F to the EP-5 in the store, I was surprised that the Pen F is slightly less tall and feels lighter than the EP-5. Olympus appears to have accomplished this by getting rid of the in-camera flash on the EP-5 (which I never used), adding the EVF, and shrinking the camera size slightly. The 20 mp sensor plus EVF seemed like a reasonable upgrade for that price. And the AF on the Pen F is really fast (though I'm not sure it's faster than the fast AF on the EP-5).
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. Here's the web page explaining it-

http://www.getolympus.com/us/en/tradeup
 
You can keep the M 4/3 light by using RF lenses and not SLR lenses. I often use the Summilux pre-asph 35/1.4 for a 70mm crop. The 25mm/1.4 Summilux (designed for the M 4/3) is a very light lens giving a 50mm crop.
 
I have the Zuiko 17/2.8 lens (designed for m4/3) which is tiny and (despite its reputation on the internet) very very good. I opted for the Zuiko 25/1.8 instead of the Summilux, mainly b/c of cost, but it too is a smallish, light lens. The Zuiko 45/1.8 and the Lumix 20/1.7 are also very small lenses and very very good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom